The Impact of Empowering Leadership on Job Performance of Higher Education Institutions Employees: Mediating Role of Goal Clarity and Self-Efficacy

Figures & data

Figure 1 Proposed research model.

Table 1 Respondents’ Demographics (N = 400)

S. No	Demographic Variables	Classification	Frequency	(%)
1	Gender of the Respondents	Male	290	72.5
		Female	110	27.5
		Total	400	100
2	Age of the Respondents	20–30	40	10
		31–40	110	27.5
		41–50	160	40
		51 and above	90	22.5
		Total	400	100
3	Highest Qualification of the Respondents	Masters	40	10
		M.Phill	150	37.5
		PhD	210	52.5
		Total	400	100
4	Experience of the Respondents	01–10 years	90	22.5
		11–20 years	210	52.5
		21 and above	100	25
		Total	400	100
5	Designation of the Respondents	Lecturer	90	22.5
		Assistant Professors	130	32.5
		Associate Professors	90	22.5
		Professors	90	22.5
		Total	400	100

Note: Source: Survey.

Table 2 Correlation and Reliability

	Cronbach Alpha	Emp_Lead	GC	SE	EJP
Emp_Lead	*	1
GC	0.957	0.327**	1
SE	0.947	0.477**	0.368**	1
EJP	0.976	0.488**	0.449**	0.475**	1

Notes: **Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). *As mentioned above Empowering leadership reliability is calculated through four constructs containing EMW, FPDM, ECHP, and PABC. Cronbach’s alpha of EMW is 0.971, Cronbach’s alpha of FPDM is 0.970, Cronbach’s alpha of EHCP is 0.977, and Cronbach’s alpha of PABC is 0.970.

Table 3 Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA)

Study Variables	Standardized Factor Loadings	CR	AVE	MSV	ASV
(EMW) Enhancing Meaningful of Work		0.971	0.919	0.600	0.270
EMW1	0.968***
EMW2	0.940***
EMW3	0.967***
(FPDM) Fostering Participation in Decision Making		0.971	0.919	0.737	0.299
FPDM1	0.960***
FPDM2	0.953***
FPDM3	0.963***
(ECHP) Expressing Confidence in High Performance		0.977	0.934	0.495	0.237
ECHP1	0.966***
ECHP2	0.965***
ECHP3	0.968***
(PABC) Providing Autonomy to Beurocratic Constraint		0.971	0.918	0.737	0.336
PABC1	0.965***
PABC2	0.952***
PABC3	0.957***
(GC) Goal Clarity		0.959	0.855	0.207	0.108
GC1	0.861***
GC2	0.969***
GC3	0.928***
GC4	0.939***
(SE) Self-Efficacy		0.949	0.706	0.269	0.146
SE1	0.780***
SE2	0.777***
SE3	0.788***
SE4	0.953***
SE5	0.939***
SE6	0.966***
SE7	0.956***
SE8	0.422***
(FJP) Employees Job Performance		0.976	0.911	0.260	0.188
EJP1	0.955***
EJP2	0.954***
EJP3	0.958***
EJP4	0.950***

Note: ***Denotes the p-value significant as 0.001.

Table 4 Discriminant Validity

	EMW	FPDM	ECHP	PABC	GC	SE	EJP
EMW	0.958
FPDM	0.681***	0.958
ECHP	0.551***	0.619***	0.966
PABC	0.775***	0.859***	0.704***	0.958
GC	0.285***	0.313***	0.251***	0.314***	0.925
SE	0.518***	0.320***	0.368***	0.327***	0.349***	0.84
EJP	0.307***	0.488***	0.435***	0.510***	0.455***	0.403***	0.955

Notes: ***Denotes the p-value significant as 0.001 (Bold values indicate higher than corresponding values indicating established discriminant validity).

Table 5 Results of Direct Relation

Hypotheses				Estimate	C.R	S.E	p	Results
H1	EMW	<—	Emp_Lead	0.78				Accepted
H2	FPDM	<—	Emp_Lead	0.871	18.231	0.063	***	Accepted
H3	ECHP	<—	Emp_Lead	0.714	14.613	0.064	***	Accepted
H4	PABC	<—	Emp_Lead	0.988	20.364	0.056	***	Accepted
H5	EJP	<—	Emp_Lead	0.518	10.277	0.058	***	Accepted

Note: ***Denotes the p-value significant at 0.001.

Table 6 Results Before Mediation

Hypotheses				Estimate	C.R	S.E	P	Results
H6a	SE	<—	Emp_Lead	0.398	8.679	0.043	***	Accepted
H6b	EJP	<—	SE	0.165	3.864	0.052	***	Accepted
H7a	GC	<—	Emp_Lead	0.353	7.541	0.045	***	Accepted
H7b	EJP	<—	GC	0.278	6.649	0.050	***	Accepted
H8	EJP	<—	Emp_Lead	0.385	8.548	0.052	***	Accepted

Note: ***Denotes the p-value significant as 0.001.

Table 7 Results After Mediation

Hypotheses		Unstandardized Estimate	Lower	Upper	P-value	Standardized Estimate	Results
H9	EJP <— SE <— Emp_Lead	0.075	0.037	0.118	0.001	0.066***	Accepted
H10	EJP <— GC <— Emp_Lead	0.113	0.079	0.153	0.001	0.098***	Accepted

Note: ***Denotes the p-value significant as 0.001.

Figure 2 Hypothesis testing results.